D.Karikalan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01.11.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH D.Karikalan

...Petitioner

-Vs1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2. The Director/Commissioner of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai.

3. The Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary), College Road, DPI Campus, Chennai 6.

4. The Chief Educational Officer, Ariyalur.

5. The District Educational Officer, Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.

6. The Head Master,

7. The Chairman, 1/4

Parent and Teachers Association,

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 3rd and 4th respondents herein to pass appropriate orders on the proposal submitted by the 6th respondent herein vide Na.Ka.No.39/2022, dated 21.09.2022 and to regularize the service of writ petitioner in time scale of pay in the light of G.O.Ms.No.35, School Education Department dated 09.02.2007 within the time limit fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.AL.Kannan For Respondents : Mr.P.Ganesan Govt. Advocate for R.1 to R.6

ORDER

Heard A.L.Kannan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.P.Ganesan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 6. With the consent of both sides, the main writ petition has been taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner herein has given a representation to the third respondent on 29.07.2010, seeking for a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to pass appropriate orders on the proposal submitted by the 6th respondent vide Na.Ka.No.39/2022, dated 21.09.2022 and to regularize the service of the petitioner in time scale of pay in the light of G.O.Ms.No.35, School Education 2/4

Department dated 09.02.2007. Since the said representation was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondent to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

4. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.07.2010 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner and that it is open to the respondents to consider the same on its own merits.

3/4

M.S.RAMESH,J.

sr

5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 01.11.2023 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No sr To

1. The Principal Secretary to Govt. of Tamil Nadu, School Education Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2. The Director/Commissioner of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai.

3. The Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary), College Road, DPI Campus, Chennai 6.

4. The Chief Educational Officer, Ariyalur.

5. The District Educational Officer, Ariyalur, Ariyalur District.

6. The Head Master, W.P.No..31313 of 2023 4/4